Size matters (1 mil vs 1.5 mil vs actual)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Blue Jinn
  • Start date Start date
Blue Jinn

Blue Jinn

Rider of the ARPocalypse
Hello,

There have been other discussions of this I know, differences between 1mil and 1.5 mil tape and its effect on transports, head wear etc. Point here is that e.g. Fostex 80, Tascam 388, recommend 1 mil. Whereas, others, like Otari 5050 don't mind 1.5.

However, looking at the numbers, Quantegy 407 (1 mil) is actually 1.3 mils, and Scotch 207 is 1.5 mils. Quantegy 456 (1.5 mil) is actually closer to 2 mils (1.99) Of course ATR is about 2.3 mils and I think billed as a 2 mil tape. I have a bunch of Ampex/Quantegy 632, which I'd like to use to dump some lp's to for transfer to CD, (for some reason I think that is easier than moving my turntable....) and also do some tracking around with as I don't have a whole lot of higher end 1/4".

The 1/4" machines I want to use it on are Teac A-3300SX, 22-4 and Fostex 80. All of them recommend 1 mil tapes. The 632 is 1.7 mils, but non-backcoated, so not quite as stiff as say 456. The specs are close to Scotch 206/207, and although a +1 VU (Ampex standard) tape, with dbx or dolby, and keeping under 0 vu seems like a decent enough tape to use, (that and I have something like 150,000 feet of it....)

The Teac machines seem to be more hardy than the Fostex, so I'm thinking I might not use this on teh Fostex after all, but thoughts on using it with the Teac's?
 
BASF/EMTEC/RMGI - 911 or 486 are thicker, but not very stiff, and transport operation is very smooth with them...or LPR35 if you want 1ml tape.
LPR35 is the same basic formulaiton as 911.
 
I'm specifically wondering pros/cons of using 632 (which I have a lot of) on a deck designed for 1 mil tape. 632 is considered 1.5 mil. It is actually 1.7 mils. Some of the "1 mil" tapes are actually thicker, e.g. 407 is 1.3 and 207 is 1.51.

And some of the 1.5 mil tapes closer to 2, like 456 and 499 which are 1.99.

There has been a lot of discussion on this already I know, and as for the Fostex especially, https://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=293411&highlight=1+mil but I thought I'd throw in some numbers too, and I'd like to give this a try on the two Teac machines. Thoughts???
 
It's not really a question of how hardy a tape deck's transport is as much as its ability to handle tape gently, coming to smooth stops and starts!

Machine manufacturers not only recommended tapes to use because of the transport but also because of marketing and pushing the idea of being able to record for longer periods of time without interruption more so then any grave concern that the wrong tape thickness is going to end in disaster if used on their machines.

Cheers! :)
 
I have a vernier caliper - it's not really designed to read increments less than .001, but it's an analog dial so you can estimate. The LPR35 seems to be right around .001, maybe a hair over.

Scotch 207 seems just over that, but not fully halfway between .001 and .002 on the dial.

Both tapes take up the same amount of space on the reel. If the Scotch were much thicker, you would think that 1800 feet would not fit on a 7" reel. I have 1200 feet of 3M 996 on a 7" reel and it reads .002.

Bottom line for me, if I have 1800 feet on a 7" reel, it can't be all that thick.
 
Blue Jinn said:
I'm specifically wondering pros/cons of using 632 (which I have a lot of) on a deck designed for 1 mil tape. 632 is considered 1.5 mil. It is actually 1.7 mils. Some of the "1 mil" tapes are actually thicker, e.g. 407 is 1.3 and 207 is 1.51.

And some of the 1.5 mil tapes closer to 2, like 456 and 499 which are 1.99.
Click to expand...

....and ATR tape is over 2mils.

See, 1 or 1.5mil is indicative of the base, where the other elements attach to, like the backing and, of course, the oxide, which will make the overall thickness always higher. The more there is, the more stiff and heavy the tape is. Generally speaking, this type of tape will put more strain on the capstan motor but whether or not it will handle it, depends on the deck. I personally think that overall thickness is more important than the base thickness alone. I would not use anything above a +6 tape and I sure wish some new +3 tape was made. I think your 632 will be fine on your decks.
 
Last edited:
Yep, 1-mil and 1.5-mil refer to the base thickness and this will vary a bit for different brands. Stretch and stiffness properties translate into reel tension settings. It’s easier for a tape deck manufacturer to make a general recommendation rather than try to sort out all the subtleties of each tape. For example, my 22-2 is optimized for 3M/Scotch 207 and Ampex/Quantegy 407, but I find SM468 (BASF/EMTEC brand) runs nicely as well.
 
Sorry, that 632 is COMPLETELY unusable on your machines. You should just sell it to me. I'll give you $1.25 per reel. ;)

Seriously, just try it out... it should be OK. A small tweak to the capstan pinch roller pressure might be in order if it seems that the tape is causing more pressure.

Cheers,

Otto
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top